federal court

A US judge has overturned President Trump's ban preventing certain media outlets from access to the White House. The ruling reaffirms press freedom protections, limiting the administration's ability to exclude journalists from presidential coverage. The decision is drawing wide attention as part of ongoing legal battles between the Trump administration and news organisations over access and First Amendment rights.

A federal judge has overturned the Trump administration's ban barring certain journalists from White House press access. The ruling restores entry privileges and has been widely covered by news outlets as a significant win for press freedom, with debate expected over whether the administration will appeal or comply with the decision.

The US Supreme Court has cleared the way for states to use the federal SAVE database to verify the citizenship status of voters. The decision allows states to cross-check voter registration records against immigration data, a step several Republican-led states have sought as part of efforts to tighten election integrity rules. Critics argue the practice could disenfranchise eligible voters, while supporters say it safeguards the ballot.

CNN reporters are back inside the White House after a federal judge ordered the Trump administration to restore the network's access to press events. The ruling marks a significant check on presidential control of press credentials, and observers are debating its implications for press freedom and the limits of executive authority over media access.

A federal judge has paused the Trump administration's move to bar CNN from the White House, allowing the network's reporters back into the building pending further legal proceedings. The case is part of a broader dispute between the administration and major news outlets over access to the president and press briefings, with press freedom groups closely watching the outcome.

A federal judge, Trump appointee Stephanie Gallagher, has held the Trump administration in contempt for deporting a man to El Salvador in violation of three court orders. The judge is ordering the government to return him. The ruling, reported by Politico legal correspondent Kyle Cheney, is drawing attention as part of the broader legal fight over the administration's immigration enforcement and compliance with court rulings.

The US Supreme Court has cleared the way for states to verify voter citizenship using the federal SAVE database ahead of the midterm elections. The decision permits election officials to cross-check voter rolls against immigration records, a move supporters say protects election integrity and critics warn could purge eligible voters and discourage registration among naturalized citizens just before voting begins.

The US Supreme Court has cleared the way for states to use the federal SAVE database to verify the citizenship status of registered voters. The decision permits election officials to cross-check voter rolls against immigration records, a move backers say protects election integrity and critics warn could lead to eligible voters being wrongfully purged. The ruling is drawing sharp reactions from voting rights groups and election officials across the country.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that Trump administration officials may use a federal immigration database to cross-check voter registration records. The decision allows states and federal officials to verify voter eligibility using immigration status data, a move supporters call a safeguard against noncitizen voting and critics warn could wrongly purge eligible voters. The ruling is expected to intensify ongoing legal and political battles over election integrity and voting access ahead of upcoming elections.

The Supreme Court has issued a decision concerning a federal voter-citizenship database, with potential consequences for upcoming midterm elections. The ruling raises questions about how states verify voter eligibility and could influence election administration and turnout battles heading into the midterms, with officials and voting-rights groups closely watching the implications.

Senator Susan Collins of Maine is running for re-election for the first time since she voted to confirm Supreme Court justices who went on to overturn federal abortion rights. Her role in shaping the court's conservative majority has become a central issue in the campaign, with abortion rights a mobilising topic for Maine voters and Democrats hoping to use it against her.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that the Trump administration may, for the time being, use its revamped federal voter eligibility database. The decision, reported by AP News and NewsNation, allows the administration to continue the programme while legal challenges proceed. The database is intended to check voter eligibility, and critics and supporters are weighing its implications for election administration and voter access.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government may use Social Security data to help identify noncitizens registered to vote. The decision, reported by The Washington Post, clears the way for expanded data-sharing between agencies to verify voter eligibility. Supporters call it a safeguard for election integrity, while critics warn it could enable improper purges of eligible voters.

A federal court ruling requires Texas to install air conditioning in its prisons by 2029. The decision follows years of complaints and litigation over dangerously high temperatures inside state lockups, where heat has been blamed for deaths of inmates and staff. It marks one of the most significant mandates on prison conditions in the state.

A federal judge appointed by President Trump has held the Department of Homeland Security in contempt after an asylum seeker was deported twice despite active court orders blocking removal. The ruling underscores judicial frustration with immigration authorities disregarding judicial instructions, and is likely to fuel debate over compliance with court orders in deportation cases and the treatment of asylum seekers.

The US Supreme Court's SAVE ruling is being read as a signal that the Court could weaken a key protection that limits last-minute voter purges ahead of federal elections. Election law watchers say the decision may make it easier for states to remove voters close to Election Day, a practice critics warn risks disenfranchising eligible voters with little time to correct errors.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is pressing the DC Circuit to vacate a drone flight restriction that effectively criminalized recording immigration agents from the air. Civil liberties advocates argue the rule blocks lawful documentation of federal immigration enforcement operations. The case has drawn attention amid ongoing disputes over the public's right to film government agents carrying out arrests and deportations.

An activist in Louisiana is campaigning to strengthen Black voting power following a Supreme Court ruling on the Voting Rights Act. The decision has narrowed key protections, prompting civil rights advocates to pursue redistricting and registration efforts at the state level. Supporters see the work as a response to weakened federal safeguards, while the ruling continues to draw criticism from voting rights groups.

The Supreme Court has taken up litigation concerning the SAVE income-driven student loan repayment plan and the federal student aid database behind it, putting billions of dollars in borrower balances back in question. The case tests the Education Department's authority to restructure repayment terms. Borrowers, servicers and policymakers are watching closely for how the ruling would reshape repayment options nationwide.

A U.S. appeals court has upheld the government's designation of AI company Anthropic as a supply chain risk, according to CNBC. The ruling keeps in place a classification with potential implications for the company's ability to work with federal agencies, including the Pentagon. The decision is drawing attention as it touches on how Washington assesses security risks from major artificial intelligence firms.

The US Supreme Court has cleared the Trump administration's expansive federal database for use in voter roll screening, per the New York Times. The move is likely to intensify debate over election integrity versus voter access, with critics warning it could lead to improper purges of eligible voters while supporters frame it as a safeguard against noncitizen voting.

A federal judge has issued a permanent injunction barring ICE from detaining immigrants at 26 Federal Plaza in New York, finding the practice unconstitutional. The ruling ends a contested detention operation at the Manhattan federal building and marks a significant legal setback for the agency's expanded immigration enforcement in the city.

The Supreme Court has issued a ruling that clears the way for New York to use an expanded federal database for verifying the citizenship status of voters. The decision could affect how the state maintains its voter rolls and verifies eligibility. Details of the ruling's reasoning and its broader implications for other states' voter verification practices remain to be seen.

Federal prosecutors have charged the owner of a semi-truck business over an alleged $105 million investment fraud scheme. Federal charges were announced in the case, though details of the alleged scheme, the accused's name, and the court involved have not yet been disclosed. The case adds to a string of recent federal prosecutions targeting investment fraud in the transportation sector.

Prediction market operator Kalshi has lost a ruling at the appeals court level concerning whether state regulators can oversee its prediction markets. The decision means states may retain authority to regulate or restrict certain event contracts, a setback for Kalshi's argument that federal law preempts state oversight of its business. The ruling is likely to shape ongoing disputes between prediction market platforms and state gaming and securities regulators.

A high court has approved the use of a federal database to weed out ineligible individuals, according to a headline circulating in news coverage. The ruling would allow authorities to rely on federal records to screen out applicants or candidates who do not meet eligibility requirements. Further details on the specific court, database, and programme affected have not been confirmed.

The Office of Personnel Management has changed the hiring questionnaire that asked federal job applicants to name their favorite executive order, acting after a court ordered the replacement of the question. The prompt had drawn criticism as an ideologically loaded test for prospective government employees, and its removal follows a legal challenge to the hiring practice.

A federal appeals court has sided with Hawaii's requirement that gun permit applicants complete the process within a set window and submit to inspection mandates. The ruling keeps in place provisions that gun rights advocates have challenged as burdensome, while state officials argue they are necessary for public safety. The decision is likely to fuel ongoing legal battles over the reach of Second Amendment protections following recent Supreme Court rulings on firearms rights.

A federal appeals court for the Sixth Circuit has ruled that Ohio can move ahead with regulating Kalshi's sports event contracts, a decision with implications for the fast-growing market in prediction and event-based trading. The ruling signals that state gambling regulators may have authority over such contracts, a outcome being watched closely by both prediction market platforms and state regulators nationwide.

A court decision could lead to new protections for rare species in California's Sierra Nevada, according to reporting by the Plumas Sun. The ruling may affect how rare plants and animals in the region are safeguarded under state or federal law. Details of the ruling and which species stand to gain protection have not been specified in the available reporting.

The Supreme Court has issued a ruling concerning the Department of Homeland Security's voter database, and officials have confirmed it will have no impact on California's 2026 general election. The decision resolves questions about whether federal voter data access could affect how the state runs its elections. California's electoral procedures for 2026 will proceed as planned.